FS9 still delivers....big time!

[out 769]

>FSX simply doesn't offer anything new, relevant to>the simulation of flight, compared to a modified FS9.That's what I keep saying in various discussions on the FS9/FSX matter.I had huge expectations and was very happy to hear FSX was coming.But... what a huge disappointment!I call FSX 'the Good Look Simulator' since the improvements are concentrated about eye candies.If someone is a VFR GA flyer it may be nice.To me, an IFR heavy iron flyer, that would be a waste of money.Especially remembering that the pure FS means nothing until we spend a lot of money on addons to make it work like we want.That's what FS9 is to me now and will stay much longer from now.Best regards,Rafal

[Guest jordanmoore]

I have both sims running well at this point. However, when it comes to my day-to-day flying...FS9 keeps winning out. It starts faster, has been rock-solid stable for me (for years), and I can fly at maxed out settings with a solid 60fps whether by myself or with a group of friends. I have tons of aircraft and places to choose from, and the environment is gorgeous. There is no technical reason why I can't use FSX at this point, and I do use it from time to time when I'm with friends that want to do a flight that would use scenery only available in FSX, but the enjoyment factor on the FS9 side remains better for me. By a substantial margin.Because the multiplayer environment I fly on supports FS9, FSX, and X-plane...for the most part none of my flying buddies care (or even know) which version of the sim I'm using unless they ask specifically.I find FSX to be interesting, but not necessarily as enjoyable.On a practical note, when faced with the option of purchasing a killer add-on for FS9 that I do not already have, or basically re-buying a FSX add-on that is similar to something I already have in FS9 (like an updated version of some aircraft I have bought before)...I buy the killer add-on for FS9. I can't see myself spending much money on FSX in the next 12 months. I don't use it enough, and many of the add-ons are not substantially different from their counterparts in FS9. What I do enjoy these days is cruising for sales on the FS9 side. Picking up things that I might not have wanted at $40, but are a lot more attractive at $20. I don't really care anymore about the "message" that sends to producers. I'm just buying what will bring me the most enjoyment in my hobby over the next 12-24 months.Finally, I will add that most of the new members of our community at Hovercontrol are using FSX. Because they are just starting in the hobby, and they have purchased the latest version of the software. Its only natural. So I don't think anything will change that powerful trend. They seem to be enjoying it just fine, and they don't have anything to compare it to. So it works for them.

[paulcroft 0]

Hi RayNice to see you're still around. Like you I don't post much these days but this post caught my eye too. I've been quite fascinated watching the non-development of FSX. I've tried it lots but 95% of my flying is still done in FS9. The failure of FSX, for me, is evidenced most obviously by the new files posted daily in Avsim. Here we are, some two years on from FSX's release and yet, whenever I check Avsim's home page, the new files for FS2004 invariably outnumber those for FSX.I must admit, however, that I await FS11 with interest because it's been my experience that, since I got hooked on FS back when it was v5.0, it's been every second version of FS that's worked well whilst the intermediate versions have invariably failed to deliver. Why this should be heaven only knows but, if this sequence continues, FS11 should be another memorable version. I'm just hoping it'll run on XP SP3; I bought a new laptop a few months ago, it's got Vista as the OS, I cannot get on with it, it's slower than XP even with 4 MB of RAM it and, as soon as I can find the time, I'll change it back to XP too. Cheers for now.Paul Croft15 miles north of EGKK

[bkeske 0]

I took FS9 off months ago, and do not miss it one bit; It will never be installed again. That chapter of FS is closed for me....as is 2002,2000,FS98,FS5.1, FS5.0a, FS5.0, etc.For the flying I do, I rarely get below the 20's, and often times maintain the 30's with my rates locked at 38....But, I'm glad to see so many enjoying the old version...blue skies... ;)

[Guest aafuss]

I've begun to fly my PMDG 737 again-so that means installing FS2004 in Vista (got a new copy as my first set of disc are badly scratched).Been getting a good frame rate 16-30fps and graphics are nice with my 512MB 8600GT with maxed settings.Tip for Vista-use compatibility mode and select disable desktop composition/disable desktop themes for best usuage. And yes, I also enjoy 2004 as well as FSX-have both FS2004 and FSX installed.

[Clutch Cargo 384]

This may be simplistic on my part but if MS was to re-write FSX to work with multi-core processors, wouldn't that solve a lot of the FPS issues?

[Gavin 99]

>This may be simplistic on my part but if MS was to re-write>FSX to work with multi-core processors, wouldn't that solve a>lot of the FPS issues?Didn't they do that with SP1? Or am I wrong?

[Chuck_B 2]

I read here that no games yet take advantage of multicore processing - multi core only works well when running two or more applications. That's why sometimes an older dual core will run flight sim better than the newest, albeit slower clocked, quad.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,905]

I must admit, however, that I await FS11 with interest because it's been my experience that, since I got hooked on FS back when it was v5.0, it's been every second version of FS that's worked well whilst the intermediate versions have invariably failed to deliver. Why this should be heaven only knows but, if this sequence continues, FS11 should be another memorable version. I'm just hoping it'll run on XP SP3; I bought a new laptop a few months ago, it's got Vista as the OS, I cannot get on with it, it's slower than XP even with 4 MB of RAM it and, as soon as I can find the time, I'll change it back to XP too.

Hi Paul,Sorry for not replying earlier. Too much football on TV and a new forum to boot! Nice to hear from you and I trust you are enjoying retirement.You're right about alternate versions being the better ones although FS98 was also pretty good too. The timing of the release of FSX was unfortunate given that Vista was relatively new and DX10 was not properly implemented. One day I hope to see that infamous lake view in FS looking just like that!Sadly I suspect it could well be a 64-bit version thereby excluding XP but if Aces learn from their mistakes it could be a classic. Let's hope so. In the meantime I'll continue to enjoy FS9. No matter how much scenery and cloud I throw at it the fps stubbornly refuses to drop below 30. :( Life is great!